The deepest balance of religion and politics

Conservatives have usually been good at balancing different powers and states in a national unity, as the conservative principle of the separation of powers in the U.S. constitution also shows. But religious conservatives affirm abstractions which slowly break apart variety and diversity, seen in the universalism of their spirituality. We can see how the necessities of living real life were thankfully added by religious philosophers, consciously or unconsciously, which offset the non-materialism and strict ascetic lives of the religious founders.

But his does not mean that ideals and abstractions should be abandoned, it means that a deeper balance needs to be found relating to real living objects, high and low. When the zenith of evolved material objects defines Godhood, then the “universal” and the “unifying” abstractions of religion can come back to reality and be included in the deepest balance. The necessity of variety in evolution, and the genetic dead end of monoculture, brought about by the unbalanced abstractions of universalism, can be balanced in theological materialism.

As I say here often, the will or spirit within life, or the material Spirit-Will-To-Godhood activates material life to evolve toward the supreme success of attaining real supermaterial Godhood within the cosmos, and this drive, working along with the natural selection process, is dominate even over the will to power, which is only a means. Deeper balance was sought and found in this religious philosophy. This is the origin of the instinctive and logical hope of theological materialism in religious philosophy, and ethnopluralism in political philosophy.

Radical feminists have a problem with women, Trump does not

 

Unfortunately, college educated young women have been increasing indoctrinated by the radical feminism taught in our colleges and universities---along with being taught cultural Marxism. Even such charmers as the British actress Emma Watson, who was miseducated at a college in the U.S., have taken up the radical feminist cause, however amateurish, which has none the less been influential.

The founders of radical feminism were mostly Marxist, or cultural Marxists, and this helped bias them toward objecting to the obvious genetic and hormonal differences between men and women, which certainly influences both gender and cultural behavior. This exposes the feminist project as intellectually bogus.

Donald Trump doesn't have a problem with women, he has a problem with radical feminists who do have a problem with both women and men. Normal women who support Trump tend not to have a problem with normal genetic and hormonal differences between men and women.  And such common sense things as equal pay for equal work is supported by all normal men and women.

Will economic nationalism rise and the debt-collecting vampires fall?

I doubt if it's fair to blame Alexander Hamilton for the destruction of America by the debt-collecting rich, who have suckered America into great destructive debt. Bankers and the interest-collecting wealthy have been siphoning off more and more of the money of the nation, which should have been used for American producers of future wealth, but instead went into the private lives of the rich. It is very clear that the wealthy rulers of the financial economy were willing to destroy the nation only so that they could become personally rich. Does this destroy the reasoning of the philosophy of capitalism and free-enterprise? No.

Economic nationalism seems like the only way out of our economic mess. Not the socialism of Bernie Sanders, or another version of big government fascism, but an economic nationalism of fair trade, with tariffs on foreign products so that American producers and American jobs can return, rather than the so-called “free” trade which has benefited the bankers and debt-collectors at the great expense of the nation. We require the old true middle way. But will economic nationalism actually rise and the debt-collecting vampires fall? Things look bad, but Donald Trump, although not perfect, like Pat Buchanan before him is at least gaining ground. But the very powerful vampires are out to destroy him.

Even conservatives confuse ethnocentrism with supremacy and imperialism

Even the paleoconservatives, the best of the conservatives, confuse ethnocentrism with supremacy, imperialism, and even Nazism. Real conservatism, deep conservatism, affirms ethnopluralism, that is, regions and states set aside for the protection and flourishing of different ethnic cultures, and denies supremacy and imperialism.

Who benefits from confusing ethnocentrism with supremacy and imperialism? Both international capitalism and socialism have benefited, as well as various powerful special interest lobby groups, at least in the short term. In the U.S. real conservatives should be spending there time in trying to figure out how the constitutional principle of the separation of powers and states can conservatively accommodate ethnopluralist states and regions.

Ethnopluralism is the instinctive and reasonable way to include real human nature in political philosophy, since real human nature remains kin-centered, ethnocentric, and primarily group-selecting, along with other traditional traits, such as being gender-defined and heterosexual marriage-making. Common sense and the evolutionary sciences have been telling us this since the dawn of human history. These are bonds rooted in biology and traditional culture and men are not “free” to reject what they are biologically---why would they want to?! In modern life, both liberals, and less so conservatives, have attempted to denature man with disastrous results.

Religion shares some of the blame for the denaturing of man, in the spiritual non-materialism and universalism it has espoused, which is why I believe theological materialism is the transformation---not rejection---of religion needed. Long-lasting civilizations ultimately depend on the sacred values and virtues of religion.

Can Trump succeed in stopping political correctness and cultural Marxism?

Intellectuals, the political class, the Big Media, and also established Republicans had their chance to try to stop the perversions and aberrations of political correctness, but they did not. The progressive ideology which runs contrary to real human nature on issues involving race, gender, religion, or sexual orientation of any kind has been increasing every year, enforced by intellectuals, the political class, the Big Media.

So now we have presidential candidate Donald Trump, who is hated by the intellectuals, the political class, and the Big Media, because he says he will put an end to political correctness. Who actually likes Trump? Many of the people who were not indoctrinated by the political correctness taught in our colleges and universities, or those who somehow escaped political correctness through sheer intellectual honesty and courage. The Baby Boomer generation should have been the conservative elders now objecting to political correctness, but most of them were propagandized in the 1960's in the march through the institutions of cultural Marxism, so the Boomers are now no help at all, and offer little help even to their own offspring.

Can Trump succeed in stopping political correctness and cultural Marxism? Both the left and right are now scheming to stop him. They might do so. But even if Trump becomes president can he block the perversions of human nature inherent in political correctness which are now embedded in our culture? It seem unlikely, although he may slow the decline a bit.

As I say here often, political correctness has tried to force square pegs in round holes. Human nature is still much the same as it has always been. All groups remain basically kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, among other things, with group-selection being the primary unit of selection. But here is the good and bad news: if Trump, or future Trumps, cannot stop the decline of the West and the aberrations and perversions of political correctness, we can be sure that natural law and human nature eventually will stop it. But it may not be pretty.

Solving the diabolical problem of human nature

Very strong drives within human nature take human nature away from human nature, with bad consequences. For example, the will to live, or the will to power of individuals and groups often denies real human nature as a means to power. Universalism and equality are promoted even as the individuals and groups who promote these things consciously or unconsciously drive for their own unequal superiority.

Throughout human history human nature has been, and remains, kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of selection. Within groups selfish individuals beat altruistic individuals, but groups of altruists beat groups of selfish individuals. Culturally and politically if we want to harmonize with real human nature we will form ourselves into ethnic regions and states protected by some sort of federalism.

I think we have a chance to be realistic and to harmonize with the laws of nature, and find a way to overcome this diabolical problem of human nature, because I do not believe that the will to power, although very powerful, is the central activator of life. I think the will or spirit within life, which I have called the Spirit-Will-To-Godhood, activates material life to evolve toward the supreme success of attaining Godhood within the cosmos, and this drive, working along with the natural selection process, is dominate even over the will to power, which is only a means. That is the origin of the instinctive and logical hope behind advocating theological materialism and ethnopluralism.

What is racism?

Friedrich Nietzsche was brilliant at exposing the equally brilliant will to power behind groups who claim to be against power. In the same way the natural origin of altruism in group-selection, or ethnic selection, has been brilliantly misdefined as “supremacy.”  “Universal” altruism has usually been the will to power of individually distinct groups selling universal altruism.

When the Germans called themselves noble Aryans, or the Jewish people call themselves the Chosen people in their most sacred writings, that is group-selection or ethnic selection working as it naturally tends to work. The problem is not the preference for ones own ethnicity, or group-selection, the big problem comes from the claim of superiority, or the imperial right, of one ethnic group over all others.

The science of sociobiology got it right when they described how selfishness beats altruism within groups, but altruistic groups beat selfish groups outwardly. That is the real origin of altruism, not the universal altruism we normally hear about. The biological origin of group-selection or ethnic-selection is the real origin of altruism---not "hate."

If the supremacy and imperial right of one group over another defines racism, than racism has it wrong. If group-selection as the biological origin of much of social behavior defines racism, including altruism, then racism has it right.
 

Given real human nature, ethnopluralism, with regions and states set aside for distinctive ethnic cultures, is the healthy way to civilize the natural will to power of group-selection, while banning the claim of superiority, or the imperial right of one ethnic group over all others. Given real human nature, this is the way to achieve as much harmony as possible between human groups.

The rise and fall of fantasy

Both spiritualism and materialism were mistaken in their inherent asceticism. The religious founders of spiritualism rejected materialism because materialism got in the way of the strict non-material path to experiencing the God or Father Within. And materialism rejected God because it got in the way of the materialist worldview. Both unrealistic restrictions led to the growth of fantasy and fairy tales.

The Grimm's tales faded as Christianity faded, and gave rise to materialism, which in turn led to the new fantasies of science fiction and computerized neo-paganism.

Theological materialism tends not to cause that yearning for fantasy, which is inherent in both spiritualism and materialism. The old inward God is transformed (but retained) as Godhood is attained in this world through the material evolution to supermaterial Godhood. Heroism, beautiful ideals, and ethical direction, backed by both religion and science, can remain realistic.

The weak link in conservatism regarding terrorism

Those who want to stop the immigration of Islamic people into this county are realistic, and those who are now crowing about how Islamic people are assimilated in America, and not in Europe, are dangerously mistaken. We have not even assimilated our black population and they have been here for many many years.

Anthropology, at least honest anthropology, has told us for years that when minorities within a population are physical and culturally different enough from the host population they will not assimilate. This is the reality in human nature and biology, where success in basic kin and group-selection traits prevent real assimilation.

The reality is that nations and cultures work most harmoniously when they are ethnocentric.

The unification of the material and non-material

Non-materialism did not balance with materialism, it merely gave a grudging nod to real life while it placed spiritualism over all things, and so mankind lost its way. The worship of non-materialism, really nothingness, caused the Great Spiritual Blockade of life itself.

The same un-balancing followed as traditionalists worshiped the past, and revolutionaries worshiped the future, which blocked real life from evolving. In philosophy, words, ideas, and numbers were worshiped over living things, even though words are only symbols of living things.

Real balance and unification comes from retaining the past as it is transformed by the present and future. And in the same way the non-materialism of the symbolic inward God can be retained as it is transformed by living and by evolving toward supermaterialism. Religion balances with the rest of life when Godhood is better understood as the zenith of material evolution.

This is the real unification of not only all the arts, but the unification of religion, science and general culture, which can join with the past, present, and future, and with evolving life, as the Great Spiritual Blockade is unblocked.

What is human nature and how are we to behave?

The old Greeks seem to have taken it for granted that if they defined “education” as bringing human nature out of us, the next stage would tell us how to behave. But as time went on these things split apart and science centered on who we are without telling us how to behave, and religion centered mainly on telling us how to behave. Now religious ideas on how to behave have been largely rejected and science has offered only amoral empiricism which few pay attention to. So hedonism and nihilism have become common in the modern world.

I think both religion and science are required to answer the question: what is human nature and how are we to behave? If we are to define education as bringing human nature out of us, then education has to feature the evolutionary science of sociobiology, which tells us that human nature remains mainly as it has been since it was formed in hunter/gatherer times---even the smallest change in human nature and our DNA structure, for example, in our immune system, takes hundreds of thousands of years--- we remain kin-centered, ethnocentric, gender-defined, and so on, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection. Sounds like traditional conservatism doesn't it?

Well, almost. Religion does not always line up well with this definition of human nature. Altruism, devotion to the interest of others, was evolved to be successful with distinct local groups competing with other groups, and was not evolved to be a universal devotion to everyone. This fact of human nature leads instinctively and logically to ethnopluralism more than to a universal political love.

In a crowded world of distinctively different groups preferring their own people, who pay little attention to religion or science, ethnopluralism is the old/new educated way to define human nature and to tell us how to behave. Future religion and science can point toward our material evolution to supermaterial Godhood, which was first glimpsed inwardly in traditional religion.

Harmonizing the differences in altruism and egoism in human groups

Sometimes simplification is necessary to understand problems that are often made more complicated by intellectuals who claim to be explaining problems. The two basic attitudes of human nature seem to me to be altruism and egoism (some say individualism). There are degrees of differences in these traits within different human groups, and those differences are based in biology (genes) enhanced by culture.

All people possess both of these traits but natural selection in evolution created different degrees of these traits based on the survival and reproductive needs of different environments. As E.O. Wilson wrote: these traits are “suspended in unstable and constantly changing positions between the two extreme forces that created us.”

I am not here defining either superiority or inferiority when I suggest that Northern people tend to be more altruistic than Southern people due to the conditions of survival in different environments. For example, the colder extremes of the Ice Age in the north demanded more long term altruism (devotion to the interests of others) than in the warmer south where survival was not as extreme. Our brains and bodies changed in adapting to these conditions.

This means that when we try to define social or political behavior we should look to actual human nature. Religion and philosophy, especially political philosophy, have too often tried to force square pegs in round holes. But while we may be different in the different degrees of altruism we possess, human nature is still much the same in other areas. All groups remain basically kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, among other things, with group-selection being the primary unit of selection.

I believe these differences, and this sameness, naturally leads to ethnopluralism. That is, the separation of distinctly different ethnic cultures into regions and states protected by some form of federalism. (The U. S.  constitutional principle of the separation of powers and states could accommodate this.) Given human nature, I think this offers us as much social harmony as possible between, and within, different groups. I think this is a better way to understand the problems of human beings than trying to divide and define groups in economic or moral or universal classes of people.

Beyond this, I also believe that the philosophy of theological materialism can provide the longer term sacred and scientific way for all groups to evolve with variety toward real Godhood, offering a future religious base, which retains but transforms past religions.

Our submissive dominated culture and the Big Four who benefit most from it

We are all responsible for our own behavior, but we have been made submissive, compliant by the Big Four: Big Government, Big Business, Big Media, and the Big Academic World.

Tolerance, diversity, not judging, are the highest values and virtues today. Why are these things so heavily propagandized? The lack of values allows the Big Four to exploit and bleed our culture.

So we are made to be tolerant of such things as homosexual marriages, pornography, equality, globalism, etc---everything but “intolerance” is allowed. Many people seem to tolerate everything because they are afraid of the social consequences of being “intolerant.” Being called a bigot can ruin lives.

It is no wonder that real human nature is again rising in the form of nationalism, ethnocentrism, localism, and populism. Will the reaction to our submissive, compliant culture have enough power to change things?
 

Trumpism in the U.S., and the Le Pen's in France are at least a beginning. The fight against these patriots by the so-called  “conservatives” of the "National Review," and the Hillary-left, is not only disgraceful it is instructive in showing how they are completely compliant to the long-arm of the Big Four.

Why and how our constitution can accommodate the real ethnopluralism of human nature

Jame Madison, one of our founding intellectuals, said that government reflects how the people define human nature. But what if the view of human nature is not complete? The constitutional principle of the separation of powers and states certainly (and brilliantly) reflects the drive for power in human nature. But what happens when the Anglo-Saxon character, tone, guiding beliefs, and drive to power of the founders of America changes? Conservatism has to effectively deal with change.

Group-selection remains the primary unit of selection in real human nature, along with being kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other traditional things---with group-selection remaining the primary unit of the most successful selection. As sociobiology has pointed out, within groups selfish individuals beat altruistic individuals, but groups of altruists beat groups of selfish individuals.

To avoid the inevitable conflicts that have come from trying to jam distinctly different people and different ethnic cultures together in the same place, I think the constitutional principle of the separation of powers and states needs to naturally apply to different regions set aside for different ethnic cultures (and protected by federalism), which defines ethnopluralism. And defining human nature as inherently sinful, or completely individualistic, or demanding equality does not solve the social disruptions caused by naturally competing groups, because these things do not reflect real human nature.

I see no real movement toward ethnopluralism in America---think of what the presidential candidates are now talking about---but there are certainly hints of it in the growing social disruptions of America and Europe, in spite of the Big Media imperial push toward globalism. We need to avoid the totalitarian movements of supremacy and imperialism that tend to rise, only to eventually fall and break back down into natural ethnostates. Our constitution can conservatively accommodate the real ethnopluralism of human nature, which can save America.

How to revive and transform intellectual conservatism

Conservative intellectuals are thought of as old-fashioned and fuddy-duddy by modern liberal intellectuals, but from my experience modern liberal intellectuals do not even read conservative intellectuals. The conservative intellectuals who write for Modern Age, Chronicles or the American Conservative actually kick their ass.

Nevertheless, the tradition of Edmund Burke-conservatism has not effectively dealt with the existential individualism of modern intellectuals, whose relativity of values has usually led them to affirm the omnipotent state and globalism. Conservatives rightly respect family, church, localism, and decentralization, but real intellectual respect for ethnocentrism, even natural xenophobia, and respect for group-selection as the primary unit of selection, has been largely missing from conservatism.

This eliminated neo-Darwinist sociobiology as one of the best defenses of conservatism, which recognized the primacy of group-selection or ethnocentrism within basic human nature, even over the all-important family in the history of successful survival and reproduction.

Conservatives instead centered on the family in contrast to individualism, which was of course important, but it was not enough. Friedrich Nietzsche, the intellectual hero of postmodern intellectuals, missed the dynamic religious transformation of the material evolution of life to Godhood, which he rejected, thereby killing God and traditional religion for his postmodern followers.

Conservatism could not get past their dislike and even hatred of the evolutionary sciences, perhaps due mainly to their religious demand for universal altruism, which was based in non-materialism or spiritualism. Altruism has always been based in group-selection and ethnocentrism, leading to localism and ethnopluralism, and not leading to religious or political forms of universalism. Modern liberal intellectuals pounced on this metaphysical error. But then modern liberal intellectuals made the same error with the universal altruism they demanded in the cultural Marxism they espoused.

The religious philosophy of theological materialism can revive intellectual conservatism, which has been largely shut down by way of eliminating neo-Darwinist sociobiology as one of the best defenses of conservatism for the modern world. As I wrote yesterday, group-selection and ethnic selection can balance and harmonize with the constitutional separation of powers and states in the U.S., so this need not be a radical change---although it may require the sacking of political correctness and cultural Marxism. This is deep conservatism.

Theological materialism retains the virtues and values of conservative Edmund Burke but adds the values and virtues of sociobiologist E.O. Wilson. Theological materialism affirms the religious and philosophical transformation of the symbolic Inward God to the real Outward Godhood reached by material and supermaterial evolution. Science and altruistic group-selection can affirm this dynamic.

Ethnopluralism with regions and states set aside (gradually) for distinct ethnic cultures, will greatly slow the social disruptions of ethnic conflicts now increasing, while remaining within the legal constitutional tradition of the United States. Again, as I wrote yesterday, we can continue to love our country as patriots while including religion and still more closely following real human nature.

How to affirm both the Constitution and sociobiology, and remain a patriot

I don't think we need to choose between the two streams of the political thinking of the Founders of our Constitution, as described by historian Larry Schweikart. I think the original political philosophy of the United States is a syntheses of both, states rights/localism (think of Jefferson) and the English Whig tradition of a central government controlled by Congress ( think of Burke and Hamilton).

Both streams believed in the separation of powers and states, limited government, private property, individual accountability, low taxation, charity, and not going abroad in search of taming monsters. Mercantilism would be de-emphasized (ie. businesses existing to advance state interests) but tariffs to protect and advance the manufacturing interests of the independent states, and having a central bank would be affirmed.

I de-emphasize, but not reject, the libertarian strain of individualism, because we now see that group-selection has been primary over individual selection in successful survival and reproduction, as shown by the evolutionary sciences, most recently by sociobiology. Group-selection really means the preference for kin and ethnic-selection, which can balance and harmonize with the constitutional separation of powers and states, so this need not be a radical change---although it may require the sacking of political correctness (cultural Marxism).

Ethnopluralism with regions and states set aside (gradually) for distinct ethnic cultures, will greatly slow the social disruptions of ethnic conflicts now increasing, while remaining within the legal constitutional tradition of the United States. We can continue to love our country as patriots while more closely following real human nature.

Which candidate for president at this time affirms this political perspective? It will come if we are to survive and prosper.

Theological materialism is idealism without spiritualism

Theological materialism affirms idealism but doesn't involve spiritualism, mere words, numbers, the philosophical games of epistemology, or the phony political versions of materialism which mistakenly believe human nature is internationally altruistic, when altruism is really kin, group, national, and sociobiologically-centered.

 

The way to affirm idealism is to affirm the idealism inherent in the materialism of evolution.  We may be limited in how we see the world, and frogs are even more limited, but it is just foolish to suggest that the world we see cannot be proven to exist.

Life evolves in this material world where at best it can evolve toward a supermaterial world, defined as real Godhood. This world of evolution can be seen as unlimited as long at it is understood as existing within the real material world.

Real limitation exists in spiritualism, mere words, and number games, and the phony political versions of materialism, not only because they define and try for an unreal world that does not exist, but because they block the limitless dynamic of material evolution.

Why are space, time and materiality thought of as “limited” by religion and philosophy? It is the wish fulfillment of spirituality, numbers, words and symbols. Are night dreams still shamanistically thought of as real life? Apparently, daydreaming, asceticism (glorified sweat lodges), and now drugs, are not enough.

We can evolve in the material world to supermaterial real Godhood if we can overcome the limitations of fantasy and spiritualism, and the mistaken political and philosophical versions of materialism and idealism.

The deeper tragedy of virtual reality, and the return of the real world

Is the world of virtual reality so new? Religion and philosophy have for centuries worshiped ideas, words, numbers, and symbols over natural reality. The real tragedy of the acceptance of virtual reality is that it has largely blockaded the evolution of material life toward real supermaterial Godhood. This is what I call the Great Spiritual Blockade. The “permanent things,” which conservatives rightly affirm, have nevertheless been taken away from the natural world and human biology, which are the foundation of the real permanent things, and a non-material spiritual world has been defined as permanent. The world of religion and philosophy have largely been as much a virtual world as the world of artificial intelligence.
 

Computers are evolving not people. The “revenge of the nerds” has become a revenge against human evolution, which has been labeled politically incorrect. I have no problem with the advance of artificial intelligence and computers in general, and I have no problem with religion and philosophy, as long as they do not worship virtual reality in place of real life and real evolution. The philosophical world of postmodernism now taught in our colleges and universities, which claims to be superior to old religion and philosophy, also worships a virtual world of ideas, words, and numbers over real life. This is really the unreal  “brave new world” we were warned about.
 

The philosophy of theological materialism seeks to remedy the great blockade of reality and restore the real permanent things, so that we may continue the evolution of material life to real supermaterial Godhood. The old, virtual, inward God can be conservatively retained but transformed in the Twofold Path, as the virtual world becomes secondary and the real world returns. A big task, yes, but it has to be done if real life is to survive and evolve on earth and out into the cosmos.

You say you want a revolution, but you may get a counter-revolution

It's not clear to me if the protesters who stopped Donald Trump's free speech in Chicago yesterday---organized by old 1960's radicals and modern minority race-baiters---are aware that they are stupidly initiating a counter-revolution which they will lose, or if they actually want that to take place. The intellectual organizers of these protests were taught the relativity of values and the higher value of power-alone by postmodernism which now rules our colleges an universities, so they may be aware of the consequences of their actions.

Have you noticed the uncomfortable, embarrassing forced smile of the liberals when Trump boldly shows no fear of being politically incorrect, which has been cowing all present politicians and media people? They barely hide their condescending anger. Apparently millions of Americans are thoroughly sick of the intellectual hypocrisy of modern liberals, and their leaders, and their cowardly fomenting of “let's you and him fight.” This may put Trump in power.

Can we avoid the doom of the West?

The American Founders understood (as the ancient Greeks did) that democracy requires a majority of virtuous citizens. A majority of Americans may still be virtuous but the elites and big lobbies who now control democracy are not virtuous. How do the actions of virtue work within a moral tradition when there is no respect for the moral tradition?

Could this mean we are doomed? We could have civil disturbances and even civil war as what is left of moral traditions battles with a post-Christian society. Those disturbances could lead back to virtue within a moral tradition---the most natural state of man---but will it be the tradition of Christianity, Judaism, Islam? Will science come up with religion from science?

I think conservatism is the healthiest dynamic to follow for any social change, where the best of the past is retained but transformed for the future. So I accept a Christianity transformed by theological materialism (the inward God transformed in the material evolution to outward Godhood), which then leads to the virtues of ethnopluralism (the constitutional separation of powers and states into ethnic regions).

I don't see a better way to show Spengler as mistaken and avoid the doom of the West.

The remedy for mere words and numbers which undervalue life, religion, and philosophy

We know that words and numbers operate as symbols. All of the world can be seen as symbols. There are things in the cosmos that we don't know yet and so we may not as yet have attached words or numbers to them. Like numbers, words have “hidden” meanings. But living things are not words or numbers, things are things, objects are objects only artificially represented by words and numbers.

The problem is that we soon start to make sense of the world only through words and numbers, and this is where we can move away from life and reality. Words and numbers can be seductive, words and numbers can seem better than living things, or things experienced. The understanding of the world only through words and numbers can be like a musical drug.

Words and numbers can symbolize things which do not exist or exist only in words and numbers in our minds. This can be a fun game and does little harm as long as it is known only as a game. Problems come when fantasy words and numbers are worshiped.

So as not to undervalue words and numbers, it it possible for us to think of things by way of words and numbers that are at first known in words and numbers and only later known as real actual things. Theoretical physics has occasionally done this, or in ancient times the Pythagorean numbers represented actual or projected musical harmonies in the world. The problem here is not that words and numbers can predict future real things, the problem comes in worshiping the words and numbers. 

This is the condition of much of religion and philosophy (especially the more esoteric versions) which often represent only words and numbers, however sacred, or worship things that are only fantasy words and numbers rather than real things. Life is undervalued this way.

When Godhood is understood as a living object, or objects, living and continually evolving in this world, and reached through material and supermaterial evolution, then this allows us to become Gods through evolution, and so we cannot and will not worship words or numbers alone as God.

This definition of evolutionary Godhood is at the present time thought and known mainly in words and numbers but must also eventually be seen and experienced as the zenith of the evolution of real living things. The tragic mistake of worshiping only words or numbers will not be made in this philosophy of theological materialism, because real concrete life needs to be guided in this world as best we can, through science, religion, and culture in general, toward evolving to real Godhood.

The older traditional words and numbers and inward experiences of God which define God need not be rejected, they can be seen as numbers, words, and symbolic experiences within the Inward Path, which now are known as real living objects that we evolve to become in the Outward Path. So conservatism in this transformation can prevail.

Why white men are voting for Trump

Since at least the 1960's white men have appeared to be increasingly weak, but many men have been too busy making money and dealing in the harsh world and so they allowed their culture to be increasing influenced by eggheads, to use Donald Trump's term.

It upsets many white men now to hear young white women saying that they don't want a culture dominated by white men. Really? Western women have been generally treated better than any other women on earth. And here is the irony: many of the more civilized traits of Western man were chosen by the sexual selection of Western women. Feminism really does seem better fitted to helping non-Western women.

That brings up the subject of cultural Marxism, which gave rise to modern feminism, modern feminism did not give rise to cultural Marxism. Young women (and men) have been propagandized in our colleges and universities, and throughout the Big Media, to mimic cultural Marxism, which basically rejects real human nature in favor of a Utopian world where everyone is said to be exactly the same, even if force is required to make it so---but even force doesn't make it happen.

Cultural Marxists, modern liberals, and feminists all claim to seek the good of the other, but they are largely ignorant of the fact that altruism was derived from group-selection or ethnocentrism, the survival fact that within groups selfish individuals beat altruistic individuals, but groups of altruists beat groups of selfish individuals. And so altruism evolved.

This is why we need to design rules of politics which organize the state not primarily to transfer the wealth of the people to an elite, who also control the military, but we need to organize around the biological dynamics of real human nature, which remains kin-centered, gender defined, age-grading, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, with group-selection as the primary unit of selection

So even if Trump initiates a nationalist version of crony capitalism---which wouldn't be good because we need a real separation of powers and states---this is why white men are instinctively voting for Trump.

The biggest blockade to overcome in modern culture

I believe we cannot stop the damage done by racism until we accept the deep biological origin of ethnocentrism. Real human nature is not evil because it is group-selecting and ethnocentric. The ethnopluralism I affirm in this blog comes from admitting the real nature of human nature. This is the biggest blockade to overcome in modern culture.

Group-selection has always been the main unit of successful selection, even over kin-selection and individual-selection. It is deeply ingrained in our biological nature. Once we admit this, then rather then hopelessly trying to force distinctly different people together into one, motley, competitive mess of people, we can find real solutions to many of our social problems.

The civil rights battles of the 1960's, which were really racial battles, did not solve our racial problems because the forced equality of cultural Marxism doesn't relate to the ethnocentric nature of real human nature. Racial relations today have been replacing white supremacism with black supremacism, causing more problems than they solve.

It may be shocking to suburban-dwelling people but both black and white radicals on the fringes of society (think of Farrakhan and Duke) have already more or less accepted the reality of ethnopluralism, although some are still trapped in unworkable and immoral supremacism.

Rather than blocking human nature we can embrace ethnopluralism by finally admitting the rational and instinctive health of allowing the natural separations of ethnic regions or ethnostates. We can encourage all ethnic groups to love their own people, which is natural to them. The U.S.  constitutional principle of the separations of powers and states could accommodate this life-saving worldview.

What is holding back this common sense approach to real life? Some men greatly benefit from trying to herd everyone together into one teeming conglomeration. They need to be exposed as the exploiters that they are. The popular media needs to eventually see the life-saving sense of ethnopluralism.

You want excitement? (to David Brooks and the New York Times)

After reading Kenneth McIntyre's excellent review in the American Conservative of David Brooks vain, “The Road to Character,” I have to add my take on the book.

I will say up front that I preferred it when our culture was more racist, sexist, pro-white and homogeneous, not unlike the traditional cultures which created the West, and furthermore, that world better reflected real human nature, which is not evil, as the evolutionary sciences have been telling us about real human nature for many years.

It was not, and is not, a boring or bland world without pornography and crude rappers everywhere---those things are drugs that fry your brain. All the “rights” movements basically promoted cultural Marxism---think of the millions killed by Lenin, Stalin and Mao---you wouldn't want to call that exciting, would you?

You want excitement? Let's get on with developing ethnopluralism, regions and states set aside for distinct ethnic cultures, which is the natural, virtuous, moral and courageous thing to do. The U.S. constitutional principle of the separation of powers and states could even legally accommodate it.

But old style moralists should not be too smug about it. We don't have to contrast holiness with happiness, both are important but secondary guides on the path of material evolution to supermaterial Godhood, which is the sacred, virtuous, and happy path to take.

Real virtue is the actions we take within the moral world of upward evolution toward Godhood. That is the natural teleology of the sacred, and I guarantee you it will not be boring.

The Next Utopia?

If the nefarious elite who control politics today manage to block populists like Donald Trump from leadership positions, it will be the beginning of the end for the present white majority culture, because the Clinton's, who are complete demagogues, will play to the minority ethnic groups who will soon be a majority of the population---demographics will have its way.

If this happens---if not now it may soon happen---then things will change, and there will be civil disruptions and even civil war as ethnic groups naturally compete with one another. If we were to design fair and biologically healthy rules for a politics of the future, rules that would harmonize best with real human nature, I propose the following:

We would need to design rules of politics which organize the state not primarily to transfer the wealth of the people to an elite, who also control the military, but we need to organize around the biological dynamic of the upward evolution of life. Free enterprise and the military are vital but they would follow the evolutionary dynamic.

Something like the polis or city states of ancient Greece, the ethnostate would be the fundamental political unit, protected by a federalism advantages to all. International research centers of sociobiology could aid in guiding healthy evolution---something like Raymond Cattell and Wilmot Robertson suggested---and the philosophy of theological materialism could help guide the Church.

This would create the variety and independent living and breeding patterns which encourage real progress in evolution, if merit is seriously considered. This would harmonize with real human nature which continues to be kin-centered and group-selecting, among other traditional traits. The federated states of the United States, with their constitutional principle of the separation of powers and states, could even accommodate this structure.

This political dynamic tends to happen naturally, as empires always eventually fall back into natural ethnostates. It seems far off for now but I think we should be taking steps, gradual, legal steps, to eventually make this a reality for all people, all ethnic groups. The present attempt to force all people together into one motley center, controlled and exploited by an elite, does not work well and will only cause destruction and decline.

Future transformations of religion

To bring about better feelings among the religions I wish Christians and other religion's would understand that "monotheism" was pan-monotheism, as Schuon pointed out, and not only Judaic-Christian. The East probably initiated the One-God conception in the Vedas, and before that Shamanistic peoples were really monotheists even as they had lesser Gods in the mix.

Following that, we can move on to understanding the Twofold Path and the nature of the virtually exclusive Inward God of traditional religions, which was seen or experienced after ascetic discipline applied to first stopping the desires of the flesh, which was the foundation of Christ's (and Buddha's) teachings.

Then we can move on to the Outward Path which transforms the Inward Path experience or symbol of Godhood into the material evolution of life to supermaterial Godhood. 

These I believe are the future transformation required as seen in theological materialism.

---

For fun, but perhaps also to help bring about positive or ecumenical feelings among competing ethnic groups, here is a very loose racial reinterpretation of Schuon's poetic ideas on the four points, directions, and colors in primordial Shamanism:

Mongoloid, Yellow, East---light, knowledge, peace

Red (proto and Native American), Red, West---fertilizing, water, revelation

Negro, Black, South---warmth, life, happiness

White, White, North---Cool, purity, strength

We can let ethnic groups be as they are and as they have been for millenniums, and let them evolve forward toward Godhood with their own qualities, in ethnic regions protected by federalism. Poetic, yes, but also realism in relation to the powerful group-selection in real human nature.

Will America take two steps forward one back with Trump?

Modern democracy seems to have failed, as the old Greek philosophers said it would, because in the United States the top 20 percent of the elite and the money class do not listen to 80 percent of the people who do not want a global empire, especially when the wealth all goes to that same 20 percent.

Power and money do seem to matter more than moral leadership. Will America really change with Trump or are we doomed to fall as all empires have fallen?

Will Donald Trump create another version of crony capitalism, bringing in corporate raiders, like his friend Carl Icahn, who will raid the other money class using government tariffs against them, and so on, only to take their place, perhaps letting Trump or at least his sons who run his business in on the action?
 

It is tragic that Pat Buchanan was treacherously blocked from giving us moral leadership as he dismantled the global empire.

Trump may at least take two steps forward by concentrating on national rather than international problems, before he takes one step backward. I suppose that is progress in the modern world.

The real religious/philosophical significance of the laws of nature

“Divine constraint?” That would be following the laws of nature as closely as we can discern them, and we would have freedom within that determinism. Natural laws provide rules for the actions of men. The question is, what are the laws of nature and how do they apply to human nature, religion and philosophy?

We can start by acknowledging the biological origin of much of cultural behavior, which has been studied closely at least since the time of Charles Darwin one hundred years ago, leading up to the Neo-Darwinism of the brilliant E. O. Wilson who developed sociobiology.

The “constraints” of the laws of nature on human nature across all cultures in the world even today have included: being kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of selection. This does not indicate a “good spirit” versus a “bad spirit,” it is a natural restraint in harmony with nature, versus a profane dissolution caused by tying to move away from what we really are.

Affirming the laws of human nature can bring real life back into the intellectual world, unblocking the Great Spiritual Blockade against our material evolution to supermaterial Godhood. The living object can once again be primary over the secondary Vedic and Platonic mere definitions of sacred things. The sacred is not separate from the creative powers of the natural world. There is no creation from nothing, there is only the continuous transformations of evolution.

This view of the laws of nature and human nature applies to the fields of religion, philosophy and science. And this gives deep significance to such things, for example, as the bio-political separations of ethnopluralism, which are most in harmony with the laws of nature and human nature, certainly far more so than the corrupt cultural Marxism and border-less global capitalism of today.